self-regulated learning: a narrative review
TRANSCRIPT
Journal for Studies in Management and Planning Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP
e-ISSN: 2395-0463 Volume 01 Issue 10
November 2015
107| P a g e http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/Available online:
Self-regulated Learning: A Narrative Review Husain Abdulhay
Payame Noor University of Qom, Iran, [email protected]
Abstract:
Issue of self- versus other-regulation is also
diligently stressed and applied in
contemporary education so as to put person
at the helm of situation, not a pawn at the
mercy of circumstances. In the same vein,
this study aims to draw attention to a newly
developed concept of learning which
overemphasizes the role of individual
learner in attunement of his thought,
emotions and strategies to accelerate and
escalate the extent of his acquisition. To do
so, an overview of this new phenomenon
known as self-regulated learning is given at
first and evidence attesting to the
fruitfulness and utility of such strategy is
dispensed in the following.
Keywords: Self-regulated learning,
motivation, cognition, metacognition,
context
1. INTRODUCTION
Self-regulated learning (henceforth SRL)
emerged as a result of inquisitiveness into
“how students become master of their own
learning” (Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons,
1990, p.4). It has been eventuated from
inquiry into the process of learning by those
learners who have been assiduous and
triumphant in their learning despite
hindrances to their efforts (ibid).
Self-regulation has gained momentum in
educational psychology consonant with
constructivism approach to learning to
attend more to the role of individual learner
and his/her needs for better management of
his/her learning. Research in educational
domain is likewise exploiting this
advancement by highlighting all aspects of
individuals which are worth the
investigation and consideration for an
effective learning to occur. This prompted
researchers to pedagogically extend an
operational definition for self-regulated
learning.
Self-regulation has come to the fore as
learner’s responsibility for learning and
taking active role for constructing his own
knowledge is much more acknowledged and
promulgated in developmental education.
Contemporary education acknowledges the
centrality of learner and learner’s
development and seeks to lend assistance to
advance this development by considering all
aspects of learning and teaching affecting
learners’ progress. Knowledge is not any
more transmitted to acquirers; rather, it is
obtained in a way, bound and determined by
learners, to actualize this entity.
Learners are much more valued in the
contemporary educational system in so far
as their roles as the builders of knowledge
are more gratified. SRL is congruent with
constructivism and learner-centered
education. Self-regulated learning is in
parallel with constructivist view of learning
and teaching in that it puts learner at the
epicenter of learning and construction of
knowledge and, hence, it merits more heed
in contemporary education. Constructivism
underscores the importance of individual
self in building meaning (Vygotsky, 1978).
Learner acts out as an umpire of feeding
inlet of knowledge to them.
Disassociation from text-based education
and moving towards constructivism seeks
Journal for Studies in Management and Planning Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP
e-ISSN: 2395-0463 Volume 01 Issue 10
November 2015
108| P a g e http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/Available online:
learners to be independent self-regulative
learners and this is much sooner
accomplished in a milieu which supports
and provides sufficient altitude for learners
to experience and implement their skills and
strategies to self regulate their learning.
Teachers can provide enough leeway for
learners to participate and engage by
creating an environment which is secure to
experience and maneuver over their
learning. Cultivating a milieu which is
encouraging and motivating allow for
experiencing and implementing skills and
strategies more willingly and get feedback
for establishing and if deemed necessary
altering their strategies to learn more
effectively.
Literature aims to spur teachers and
practitioners to reckon at learners’
responsibilities and decision making,
congruent with constructivism and schism
from transmission of knowledge, rote
learning, and spoon-feeding schools of
teaching.
2. REVIEW OF THE RELATED
LITERATURE
Self-regulated learning has been in the
limelight over the last three decades. It has
grabbed attentions among academics and
psychologists. It stems from educational
psychology and percolates in educational
and non-educational studies and instruction.
SRL has attracted many fields from
psychology to mathematics, health, sport,
medic, technology, policy making, and
language education. Myriad empirical and
non empirical studies exist concerning
educational and non educational self-
regulation learning.
Effect of self-regulatory strategies on
academic success has been well established
in many studies (Pintrich & De Groot, 1990;
Pintrich, 1990; Zimmerman, 1990). Self-
regulated learners indulge much higher self-
propulsion in their learning in comparison
with those who do not self-regulate.
Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons (1990) refer
to a growing body of correlational research
which denotes higher achievements with
greater usage of learning strategies by self-
regulated learners than with little utilization
of self-directed learning strategies.
Wolters, A. C. (2010) in a review study
entitled the relation between the 21st Century
and self-regulated learning (SRL), with
reference to multiple studies, evinced that
however forging students into a self-
regulated learner establishes the stepping-
stone to volition, motivation, and self-
management in them, transferable also to
contexts outside of school.
Effect of schooling on the different
dimensions of self-regulated learning has
been examined in different fields of study. Leutwyler, Bruno & Maag Merki, Katharina
(2009) in a longitudinal study extending for
almost two years in gymnastic school
revealed significant effect of schooling on
development of self-regulatory capacity of
young learners.
Pratontep and Chinwonno (2008)
scrutinized the self-regulated learning
strategies of 30 Thai university students in a
reading comprehension program. The results
uncloaked significant differences between
the students’ English reading
comprehension, divided into upper and
lower level groups based on their
competencies in reading comprehension,
especially for the lower level group, in pre-
and post-test. Students reported frequent use
of metacognitive and performance
regulation strategies through the self-
regulated learning interview schedule. The
students in upper level group actively used
self-regulated learning strategies more often
than the lower level did to regulate their
Journal for Studies in Management and Planning Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP
e-ISSN: 2395-0463 Volume 01 Issue 10
November 2015
109| P a g e http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/Available online:
metacognition and performance.
Furthermore, the students’ verbal protocols
of reading unveiled the use of self-regulated
learning strategies in the performance or
volitional control phase more often than in
the forethought or self-reflection phases.
The positive effects of interventions
studies designed to promote students’ SRL
have now been well established. Training
programs are carried out and pilot tests are
conducted as part of the syllabus or running
experiments to enhance self-regulated
learning. Cleary and Zimmerman (2004)
present an anecdote of a cyclical model of
academic self-regulation in a case study
program to highlight the primary processes
and techniques used by an self-regulation
coaching (henceforth SRC) working with a
12-year-old Caucasian student and,
eventually, to empower her self-regulation
skills. The program was sprouted from
social-cognitive theory and research and
integrated many of the essential features of
the problem-solving model. Interventions
used in the Self-regulation empowerment
program (SREP) comprising making
graphic, cognitive modeling and coaching,
and structured practice sessions. The SRC
assessed Anna’s motivational profile as well
as how she used strategies to self-regulate
her learning according to triadic phases of
self-regulation and, at the end, after getting a
feeble grade in the tests she was offered an
intervention approach in an individualized
training program to teach her to set goals, to
record in person the performance processes
(i.e., strategies used) and outcomes (i.e., test
grades), and to evaluate goal progress and
strategy effectiveness. The intervention
programs at the end endorsed her improved
test score of 90 as a result of her newly
acquired study strategies.
The training program much attended to
the psychological side of Anna and
encouraged her to press in and press on by
recording and monitoring her progress with
the help of delivered self-regulation
strategies taught by her coach. Taking more
responsibility for her learning and
modifying her beliefs and motivating herself
helped Anna to elevate her grades in school.
The studies bear robust evidence of the
positive effects of SRL instructional
programs on children's academic
achievement. It must also be mentioned that
training programs will benefit more students
and even educators when they are
implemented concurrent with other
academic interventions or social programs
and when they consider all aspects of
learners (affective, cognitive, motivational
and cultural) and learning settings and self-
regulation stages cannot be applied in a rigid
way to every learning activity (ibid).
Causal-effect study carried out by Liu
(2008) showed that self-regulatory capacity
of learners can predict learners’ self-
perceptions in English achievement that in
practice affects their successes. This notifies
how the enrichment of self-regulatory
capacities in the forms of perceptions and
beliefs assists learners to attain success.
3. A DEFINITION OF SELF-
REGULATED LEARNING
Self-regulated learning is a composite
concept encapsulating besides cognitive and
metacognitve strategy also motivation and
affection in its framework. Currently, self-
regulation is recognized as an amalgamation
of cognition, metacognition, motivation and
emotion. Zimmerman (1989) posits that the
learner’s decisive self-management of
environment, behavior, and personal
processes is the most visible indicator of a
learner’s degree of self-regulation.
Self-regulated learning with its
broadened definition is “multi-component,
Journal for Studies in Management and Planning Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP
e-ISSN: 2395-0463 Volume 01 Issue 10
November 2015
110| P a g e http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/Available online:
iterative, self-steering processes that target
one’s own cognitions, feelings, and actions,
as well as features of the environment for
modulation in the service of one’s own
goals” (Boekaerts and Karoly, 2005).
Paris and Paris (2001) identify self-
regulated learning in its three words as the
mobilization of autonomy and control by the
individuals steering and regulating their
actions toward attainment of the goals.
While self-regulation is defined in its
discourse meaning as control process of
learning, academic self-regulation is
identified as proactively active participation
of learners in the process of learning.
Theorists have their own set interpretation of
self-regulated learning contingent upon
tradition and schools they’ve adopted for
learners’ learning processes.
The terms “self-regulation” and “self-
control” are being used interchangeably,
albeit some subtle distinctions are drawn by
different researchers. Some use the term
self-regulation more broadly to refer to goal-
directed behavior whereas “self-control”
may be associated specifically with
conscious impulse control (Baumeister and
Vohs, 2004). To Schmeichel and Baumeister
(2004), self-regulation associates well with
both conscious and unconscious alteration of
responses by the self, while “self-control”
implies a more explicit and cognizant
process of response alternation. By the same
token, it can be said that through self-
regulation learners wages into acting of the
self to change its own responses.
Zimmerman (1990) asserts that however
self-regulated learning is defined differntly
according to adopted theoretical orientations
by different researches but the commen
conceptualization shared among them is that
self-regulated learners are cognitively,
metacognitively, motivationally and
behaviorally predisposed to accomplish their
goals . To become self-regulated learner
means that one becomes adept in orientating
his/her learning to reach his/her own goals
despite cognitive, motivational and
emotional impediments. Self-regulation
enacts as an interim gadget for optimizing
learning and expediting process of goal
achievement. Paris and Paris (2001)
propound that each person builds his/her
own theory of self-regulation.
Self-regulation appeals for heeding the
interplay of context and individual behavior
(Bandura, 1986). Many instruments and
methods exist and are developed to
understand self-regulation (e.g. the Learning
and Strategies Study Inventory to assess
self-regulation strategies in general; LASSI
(Weinstein, 1987) , Scale of English Self-
Regulated Learning Strategies originated by
Wang, Wang, and Li, 2007 and Motivated
Strategies for Learning Questionnaire,
MSLQ originated by Pintrich, Smith, Garcia
& McKeachie (1993).
4. THEORIES AND MODELS OF SELF-
REGULATED LEARNING
STRATEGIES (SRLs)
SRL is examined against various
theoretical perspectives for the inclusion of
many facets of control and learning (Paris
and Paris, 2001). They name Piaget’s
constructivist theory, Vygotsky’s socio-
cultural theory, social learning theories, and
information-processing theories as the
central tenets of these theoretical
perspectives to study SRL. Zimmerman
(1989) expounds it in terms of
phenomenological, social cognitive,
Vygotskian and cognitive constructivist
theories and volitional.
The most prominent theory which
overshadows the self-regulation studies and
research is Albert Bandura’s social cognitive
theory (Zimmerman and Schunk, 1989).
Journal for Studies in Management and Planning Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP
e-ISSN: 2395-0463 Volume 01 Issue 10
November 2015
111| P a g e http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/Available online:
Zimmerman (1995), the avant-garde author
on self-regulated learning, pursues social
cognitive theory to study self-regulation.
However, social cognitive theory has
illuminated self-regulated learning studies
by providing a holistic backdrop against
which the self processes are enacted. It seeks
to emphasize reciprocal interactions between
the environment, the person, and his/her
behavior (Bandura, 1997). It purveys a
theoretical framework to scrutinize learning
in its real context. All the contributors,
inside and outside of the individual learners,
to control and regulate learning is
encapsulated in social cognitive theory.
Learners, in this theory, are identified with
their thorough dimensions in which their
thoughts, feelings and actions interact
reciprocally in an integrating and molding
environment to generate the desired
learning.
Social cognitive theory addresses the
interrelationship between the learner, the
learners’ behaviors, and the social
environment of classroom (Bandura, 1997).
Social cognitive theory expounds on how
learners’ properties are influenced by
characteristics of learning environment. It
represents a broad spectrum of the factors
which influence the learners and learning
processes. With the help of the theory
researchers are enabled discern umbilical
nexus between the learners and learning
environment. The consideration of
environment in determining actual learning
is urged by social cognitive theory, an
assumption akin to Vygotscian view of
learning, to swerve the riveted attention on
the sole studies of cognitive individual
development.
Social cognitive theory regards
contextual or situational variables as potent
contributors to students’ motivation and
self-regulation than personal attributes. It
implies in a sense that the context is
influential in individual’s cognitive,
behavioral and motivational processes of
learning. In this view, the individual’s self-
regulated learning is not seen as a stable trait
in all situations. However it is liable to
alternation and change over the course of
time and leaned upon different settings. So
as a result of the application of this theory to
education, self-motivational beliefs and
behaviors will vary depending on the nature
of educational setting or the specific tasks
which learners are required to do.
There are many models of self-regulated
learning each of which originates from a
different theoretical perspective. In the
domain of academic studies many models of
self-regulation have been projected, each of
which traces back and is imputed to a
different theoretical approach, which
categorically overlap in their construct and
conceptualization (Wolters 2010). The
following showcases some, the most
prominent of which is the Zimmerman’s
model.
A. The Personal Responsibility Orientation
model set forth by Brockett and Hiemstra
(1991)
B. The Effort Management Hierarchy model
developed by Thomas and Rohwer (1993)
C. Zimmerman’s three-phase self-regulation
model (Zimmerman, 1990)
The Personal Responsibility Orientation
model set forth by Brockett and Hiemstra
(1991) places self-direction in learning as an
overriding theme with two related sub-
dimensions. There exists the following two
constructs under the umbrella of self-
direction: (a) self-directed learning which
incorporates the concepts of the adult learner
and teaching-learning process set forth by
Knowles, and (b) learner self-direction
which focuses on characteristics internal to
Journal for Studies in Management and Planning Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP
e-ISSN: 2395-0463 Volume 01 Issue 10
November 2015
112| P a g e http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/Available online:
the individual that incline person toward
taking self-initiated onus.
According to Thomas and Rohwer
(1993), the effort management hierarchy
model is based on four hierarchical levels of
study activity. These activities include
monitoring, self-regulation, planning and
evaluating. Thomas and Rohwer purport that
learner self-direction occurs in a continuum
of activities which range from awareness of
needs to individual control of one’s study
efforts including concentration, time and
effectiveness of learning. They add that the
key to self-directed learning is regulation
and remediation.
Zimmerman’s triadic self-regulation
model introduces self-regulation as a
cyclical process involving learner
assessment and feedback of personal,
behavioral, and environmental factors
during three phases of the learning process:
(a) the forethought phase during which goal
setting and social modeling occur; (b)
performance control during which the
learner compares their performance to that
of other learners and provides self-
instruction regarding learning strategy; and
(c) self-reflection, the stage of self-
evaluation, resultant feedback, and self-
reward for performance success (Schunk,
2001).
Pintrich (2000) proposes four
assumptions for self-regulation and learning:
The first assumption, active constructive
assumption, assumes that all acquirers be
active, efficient participants in the learning
process. Learners subsume new material and
anchor it based on previously internalized
information to establish individualized
meaning, purposes, and strategies. Secondly,
control potential is the assumption that
learners have the ability to self-manage their
thought processes, motivation and behavior
and the environment. Third, goal
assumption, assumes that learners set goals
and self-regulate their efforts by monitoring
thought processes, behavior, and motivation
en route to reaching those goal. The fourth
assumption, mediation, recognizes the role
of learners’ personal, behavioral, and
environmental self-regulation processes of
learning for adjusting mercurial volatility of
the individual, the learning context and goal
attainment (ibid).
Paris and Paris (2001) extended a
developmental metaphor of self-regulation
based on socio-cultural model of learning in
which students develop competencies and
become more self-regulated. In this model
of learning Piagetian tenet is also applied in
which behaviors are molded and organized
through participation of learners in zone of
proximal development and self-regulation is
an adaptive representation of this
organization demonstrated in a situation
than a set of skills to be learnt (ibid.).
5. COGNITIVE & METACOGNITIVE
FACETS OF SELF-REGULATED
LEARNING
Metacognition is considered as an effective
strategy for putting self-regulation into
effect. Positive direct effects of
metacognitive self-regulation on deep
learning strategies and on self-regulatory
strategies was sealed by Al-Harthy and Was
(2010).
Metacognition is ken about cognition and
regulation of cognition. It refers to ability to
mull over and control ones’ own learning
(Flavell, 1979, 1981). Knowledge about
cognition encompasses three sub-processes
facilitating reflective aspect of meta-
cognition: declarative, procedural and
conditional knowledge. Regulation of meta-
cognition includes planning, monitoring,
debugging and evaluation of strategies. The
metacognitive self-regulation component
Journal for Studies in Management and Planning Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP
e-ISSN: 2395-0463 Volume 01 Issue 10
November 2015
113| P a g e http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/Available online:
refers to the awareness of and control over
the cognitive processes.
Susimesta (2006), in an attempt to
identify the theoretical and empirical
boundary line between self-regulation, self-
regulated learning and metaconition,
concluded that drawing a boundary line
between cognition skills and strategies and
metacognition skills and strategies is
sometimes difficult. Dinsmore, Alexander,
and Loughlin (2008), by rehashing and
dissecting 225 studies, found that
metacognition is so pertained to cognitive
orientation while self-regulation more to
human action. Duckworth, K., Akerman, R.,
MacGregor A.,Salter, E., & Vorhaus , J.
(2009) endorse that cognitive and non-
cognitive skills are entwined.
Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons (1990)
purport that, students who are mecognitivley
aware show a better performance and are
more strategic than those learners who are
less informed of. Not to mention, many of
the metacognitive knowledge and skills are
not necessarily and specifically taught in
classroom. As Elliot (1999) puts it, students
mould their ideas and reactions gradually
and only after undergoing many challenging
learning.
However, there is some inconsistency
between findings in some researches. Pokay
and Blumenfeld (1990) evidenced the
negative relationship between meatcognitive
strategy use and achievement. To quote
Zimmerman (1995, p. 217), “it is one thing
to possess metacognitive knowledge and
skill but another thing to be able to self-
regulate its use in the face of fatigue,
stressors, or competing attractions”.
6. MOTIVATIONAL FACETS OF
SELF-REGULATED LEARNING
According to Boekaerts, M. (1999) most
studies have focused on modifying cognitive
dimensions of self-regulation for optimal
learning to happen than those of affection,
motivation and performance. Zimmerman
(1995) claims that self regulation is more
than metacognitive ken and thinking skills.
It concerns with self efficacy beliefs and the
sense of agency and going through
motivational and behavioral processes to
effectuate the in-place beliefs. However,
self-regulation is comprised of a convoluted
system of social, motivational and
behavioral processes that is inaugurated by
individual referenced to self-factor (ibid).
He persuades and prevails on researchers to
traverse metacognitive knowledge and skill
to consider more the motivational and
behavioral processes underlying self-
efficacy and personal agency for
effectuating these self beliefs.
Reaserch in domain of strategy
instruction denotes that strategy awareness
is good predictor of learners‘ use of
strategies but motivatioenal belief of lerners
is good indicator of putting these strategies
into use. Motivational studies of self-
regulation are escalating as motivational
beliefs play a significant part in deployment
of metacognitive strategies (Wolters C, A. &
Pintrich P, R. 1998; Young, 2005).
Studies on motivation and strategies
demonstrate a close link between
motivational beliefs and use of strategies.
Existing research has documented positive
relations between students’ academic self-
efficacy and their use of self-regulation
strategies (Schunk, 2005). In an early
schooling study, Pintrich and De Groot
(1990) found that middle school students’
self-efficacy beliefs were positively related
to their cognitive engagement and academic
performance. The findings documented that
school children who believed they were
capable of learning were more likely to
Journal for Studies in Management and Planning Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP
e-ISSN: 2395-0463 Volume 01 Issue 10
November 2015
114| P a g e http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/Available online:
report use of SRL strategies and to persist
longer at difficult academic tasks.
Paulsen and Gentry (1995) examined the
relationships among motivational variables
(intrinsic and extrinsic goal orientation, task
value, control of learning, test anxiety, and
self-efficacy), cognitive learning-strategy
subcategories (rehearsal, elaboration, and
organization), self-regulation subscales
(time, study, and effort), and students’
academic performance (final grade) in an
Introduction to Financial Management
course. They found that all motivational
variables were significantly related to the
academic performance, final grade in the
course, where path analysis revealed the
self-efficacy as the strongest predictor of
performance.
Motivational beliefs act as cantilevers
which strengthen the suspensions of
attitudes to sustain effort and persistence for
finalizing the goal. Self-regulated learner is
tantamount to a self-efficacious learner who
persists in his beliefs despite worries and has
the adequate will to strive to attain his goals.
Self-regulated learner is tantamount to a
self-efficacious learner who persists in his
beliefs despite worries and has the adequate
will to strive to attain his goals. Research
denotes that effective self-regulation is
pivoted on students’ sense of self-efficacy
for self-regulating their learning and taking
on actions (Schunk, 1995).
7. ENVIRONMNETAL FACETS OF SELF-REGULATED LEARNING
SRL is conceptualized as a dynamic
process enhanced by some contextual
features (Boekaerts and Corno, 2005).
Social cognitive theory sets great store by
interrelated interaction of the environment,
the person, and his or her behavior
(Bandura, 1986). Social cognitive theorists
postulate that student’ social experiences in
learning environment, particularly their
interactions with teachers, can affect self-
regulated learning (Zimmerman, 1989). An
allover calibration of the factors influencing
learning overshadowed by social cognitive
theory has helped researchers and educators
to scrutinize self-regulated learning much
scrupulously.
Myriad studies of strategy instruction
have shown that cognitive practices along
side with non-cognitive support result in
higher attainments. Pintrich and De Groot
(1990) believe that the importance of
classroom contextual factors for instigating
key enablers of learning, viz. ‘will’ and
‘skill’ represented as older cognitive models
of learning, to succeed is irrefutable.
Zimmerman (1997) recognizes
environmental determinants as physical and
social attributions. Social experiences in
learning are like autonomy support,
feedback to self-evaluate, leaner-centered.
Influence and contribution of learning and
teaching context and domains can be
examined at three levels of macro (school)
micro (classroom) and personal (individual
level) and this study only considers the
social aspects of learning and teaching at
micro levels. Physical attributions are
facilities, equipments, arrangement of
classroom and et cetera.
There are multitudes of studies that
vindicate the irrefutable effect of the
contextual factors on developing self-
regulatory capacity of learners (Cleary and
Zimmerman, 2004; Lin, 2004; Perry, 1998;
Sungur and Gungoren, 2009; Wolters and
Pintrich 1998; Yen, 2005; Young, 2005). In
a correlational study conducted by Yen
(2004) the strength of association between
student-teacher interactions and self-
regulated learning(r =.36, p <.01) was found
to be large which endorsed once again the
Journal for Studies in Management and Planning Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP
e-ISSN: 2395-0463 Volume 01 Issue 10
November 2015
115| P a g e http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/Available online:
constructive role of teachers in creating a
setting conducive to fostering and spurring
student's self-regulated learning. Young (
2005) in a study aiming to fathom
motivational effect of the classroom
environment in facilitating self-regulated
learning found that delivery with high
interaction, encouraging feedback, and clear
goals that emphasize learning over grades
will augment intrinsic motivation and the
use of self-regulated learning strategies.
Leutwyler and Merki (2009) conducted a
longitudinal study in an ecologically valid
setting of 20 public and two private high
schools in Switzerland (Gymnasium, ISCED
3A) without specific training programs. The
results showed the significant effects of
schooling and instructional processes on
students’ progress in self-regulated learning
though differing in degree of stability
contingent upon different features of the
school and instructional process. The
development of many aspects of cognitive
and metacognitive self-regulation was
impacted by school process variables, to a
greater degree, than students’ extra-
curricular experience. The findings implied
the effect of various social and didactical
factors on the promotion of self-regulation
of cognitive, metacognition and motivation.
Cognitive and metacognitive self-regulation
variances explained by these variables
ranged between 1.8 % for transformation
strategies and 5.3 % for monitoring
strategies and evaluation strategies.
Perceived social inclusion played an
important role in the positive development
of practically all dimensions of motivational
self-regulation (βmin = .131; p < .05). With
regard to the didactic aspects of classroom
instruction, requiring students to elaborate
frequently promoted the development of
intrinsic motivation (β = .089; p < .05) while
teachers’ use of a process orientation
showed no effect at all and high self-reliance
of learners had a demonstrable effect on
only one single case. The degree of
transferring orientation in teaching
(measured using the scale “elaboration”)
illustrated the positive relations with the
development of cognitive and metacognitive
self-regulation. Only one association
between motivational self-regulation and
teachers’ use of transfer orientation was
demonstrable in isolated cases only. Gender
had impacts only on some aspects of
cognitive and metacognitive self-regulation,
explaining between 12.8 % and 25.3 % of
the variance for monitoring strategies and
transformation strategies and explained
much of the variances in motivational self-
regulation both of which accounted for
students’ starting conditions.
Critical role of specific contextual and
situational variables on students’ motivation
and self-regulation has been attested in
recent studies. (Lin, Xi-zhe 2004;
Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002; Young, 2005;
Zimmerman, 1989). Classroom environment
contributing to students’ motivation and
autonomy to have opportunity and take
responsibility for personal experience is
recommended by Paris and Paris (2001).
Many aspects of learning
environment like autonomy support in the
form of providing choices and opportunity,
teaching programs, teaching approaches,
student-teacher interaction, and motivational
beliefs have been found to contribute to
fostering and development of this skill
(Ames, 1992; Lin, 2004).
The optimal conditions for developing
self-regulation occur when children and
young people have an opportunity to pursue
goals that they themselves find meaningful;
they will also be invited to develop their
skills by selecting their own activities,
taking initiative, engaging in challenging
and co-operational learning experiences and
making their own decisions (Boekaerts and
Journal for Studies in Management and Planning Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP
e-ISSN: 2395-0463 Volume 01 Issue 10
November 2015
116| P a g e http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/Available online:
Corno, 2005). Self-regulation, as an
indivisible compartment of such
professional development, is emphasized by
social constructivist theory. This means that
knowledge is constructed through social
interaction and is a shared experience rather
than an individual one (Vygotsky, 1978).
Teachers need to be involved in sharing and
reflecting on their practices with their
colleagues. Teachers leading a solitary
practice may not be aware of the need to
make changes in their instructional
perspectives. Teachers’ collaboration with
one another has been widely studied as a
remedy to the isolation that many teachers
experience. Butler, et al., (2004) propound
that cooperation creates a professional
learning community that holds members
accountable while sustaining momentum
during “inevitable challenges”.
Classroom environment contributing to
students’ motivation and autonomy to have
opportunity and take responsibility for
personal experience is recommended by
Paris and Paris (2001). So as for learners’
self-regulated learning a supporting and
empowering environment is likewise
required to be designed and implemented by
teachers and educators to motivate learners
to deploy self-regulatory strategies.
Harrison and Prain (2009) conducted a
case study on 11 year 8 students’ self-
regulation of learning beliefs and practices
in two English task completion and
engagement within an 11 month schooling
program influenced by the learning and
teaching processes, contextual,
organizational factors in an Australian
regional secondary school context with a
low socio-economic origin. Students were
questioned on affective and cognitive
strategy uses after completing tasks by the
authors and teachers after two or three
weeks. students reported use of self-
regulatory strategies by honing independent
learning through constructing an
environment that cater for their differences
in interest and also by harnessing structure
of the class and learning and teaching
process.
The research comprised part of a tri-
schooling study project to obtain self-
regulatory capacities of students on lessons,
within and in pursuit of task completion
activities, by classroom observations and
interviewing learners and teachers. Their
perceptions and strategies were noted these
were coded as the springboard for the
further analysis on the self-regulatory
development patterns. Engagement was
operationalized in respect of cognitive,
emotional and behavioral processes. Within
task completion, interview yielded that
learners reported affective responses to the
tasks and use of strategies.
Among 11 participants, nine showed
sundry self-regulatory tactics, alacrity to
take responsibility for executing the tasks,
seeking help from teachers and classmates
and peer learning and happiness on
achieving set goals and also managements of
their own times. One of the participants,
Albert, having gone through inquiry into his
failure on task completion revealed that he
had difficulty in implementing the strategies
he had shown at other skills than school
work at which he was good.
Experiencing transformed organization of
the class in a new learning community and
teacher’s expectation of students to work
independently in inquiry time had
significant impact on student’s perceptions
and subsequently on their self-regulatory
practices. The new learning community
brought with it the convolution of each
specific environment which had an enabling
effect on students’ developments. Support of
teachers showed significantly the
improvement of self-regulatory strategies.
Journal for Studies in Management and Planning Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP
e-ISSN: 2395-0463 Volume 01 Issue 10
November 2015
117| P a g e http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/Available online:
Unscheduled syllabuses in the new learning
community dissipated the monotony of the
activities while provoking some uncertainty
and anxiety over what will come next but
axiomatically offering more challenge and
responsibility and providing more
opportunity in the new environment.
Results had some implications for future
reinforcement of self-regulatory capacity of
schoolchildren students through caring for
students’ differences, providing non-rigid
and positive non-competing learning
environment, more accurate learning
evaluative system, and support for teachers
to meet student’s need collaboratively.
8. IMPORTANCE OF SELF-
REGULATED LEARNING IN
ACADEMIC ENDEAVORS
Self-regulated learning has been introduced
in education taking its roots from
educational psychology. SRL has grabbed
attention of many people from different
fields from psychology to mathematics,
health, sport, medical, technology, policy
making, marketing and language education.
It is in line with constructivist epistemology
and in parallel with the learner-centered
education and gradual schism from teacher-
directed learning through providing learners
with opportunity and laissez-faire to have
control over their learning skills and
participating them in decision-making
Educational psychology research has
dealt extensively with self-regulation and its
significance as a mediating variable for
academic performance, success and social
competence (Zimmerman, 1990; Magno,
2010). Self-regulated learning is a
composite concept encapsulating apart from
cognition and metacogniton also motivation
and affection in its construct.
Effect of self-regulatory strategies on
academic success has been well-established
galore in many studies (Kitsantas, Steen, and
Huie, 2009; Lindner and Harris 1992;
Pintrich, 1999; Pintrich and De Groot, 1990;
Zimmerman, 1990). In the realm of
academic self-regulated learning cross-
sectional and longitudinal studies in
naturalistic and non naturalistic contexts
prevail that do address the development and
enhancement of self-regulated learning.
Self-regulation is believed to be the best
predictor of academic performance on all the
outcome measures, suggesting that the use
of self-regulatory strategies, such as
comprehension monitoring, goal setting,
planning, and effort management and
persistence is essential for academic
performance on different types of actual
classroom tasks (Boekaerts and Corno,
2005; Zimmerman and Pons, 1986, 1988).
Previous studies dealt exclusively with
pure cognitive models of SRL but by
expansion of theories and models research is
currently encapsulated other dimensions of
self-regulated learning which interplay in
self-regulated learning process. Duckworth
et al. (2009) state that self-regulation is not
concerned with ‘thinking skills’; it also
questions the role of emotion, motivational
beliefs, self-concept and contextual factors
in learning. The word self is more
appreciated when it is reflected as a whole
enacting and formulating in connection with
world. Individual as a whole entity
integrated in setting, yields more precise
speculations about his thought, motivation
and behaviors.
Studies depict that the acquisition of self-
regulation skills is not an all or nothing
phenomenon learnt overnight. This is not a
skill acquired instantaneously and
automatically and like other learning needs
to be nurtured and practiced by schooling. It
Journal for Studies in Management and Planning Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP
e-ISSN: 2395-0463 Volume 01 Issue 10
November 2015
118| P a g e http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/Available online:
is a skill that beings from early schooling
and continues to flourish cognitively by age
and diminish motivationally at the same
time, invigorated and empowered by co- and
other-regulation. Hong and O’Neil (2001)
revert back to multitudes of studies which
evince that it is a trait which is not stable
and is subject to fluctuation and oscillation.
While many educators consider self-
regulation as a set of skills, some consider it
as the deployment of all individual resources
to invigorate learning process. Paris and
Paris (2001) extended a developmental
metaphor of self regulation based on socio-
cultural model of learning in which students
develop competencies and become more
self-regulated. In this model of learning
Piagetian tenet is also applied in which
behaviors are molded and organized through
participation of learners in zone of proximal
development and self-regulation is an
adaptive representation of this organization
demonstrated in a situation than a set of
skills to be learnt (ibid.).
Self-regulation is also studied as the state
or the trait attributes in relation to the
psychological characteristics. With self-
regulation as a protean system, trait-related
measures are also important in self-regulated
learning to be studied in connection with
academic performance. Hong and O’Neil
(2001) concur that differences of trait and
state constructs for self-regulation in
individual learners are also in need of
consideration both for learning and
performance and for offering training
programs by instructors. Winne and Perry
(2000) maintain that self-regulated learning
measure tools can be categorized as an
aptitude gauge and an activity (event) gauge.
Measurements of aptitude examine stable
qualities and properties of students that
represent predictable behaviors in the future
that come in the form of self-reporting
questionnaires, structured interview and
teacher judgment or as event gauge which
describes state and processes of individuals
while they are self-regulating.
The research on self-regulation has not
been limited to the traditional settings and
are implemented to nontraditional settings
like distance education and online learning
where personal and self-factors more than
social and contextual factors play a
definitive role in prompting academic
achievement (Azevedo and Seibert 2004;
Susimesta, 2006).
In addition, many studies on self-
regulated learning have been done in the
domain of foreign language learning.
English learning skills also have been
subject of inquiry in terms of exploitation of
self-regulated learning strategies. Usefulness
of self-regulation as a strategy for
productive learning in second language
learning and acquisition discipline is being
endorsed by several studies (Harrison and
Prain, 2009). Tseng, Dörnyei, and Schmitt
(2006) evinced the transferability of self-
regulation construct from educational
psychology into the field of second language
acquisition by examining self-regulatory
capacity for vocabulary learning strategies
of Taiwanese university and high school
students.
However it should be noted that,
very few studies exist that systematically
delve into how far elements of self-
regulation differ by gender (Zimmerman and
Martinez-Pons, 1990), or by characteristics
of the family such as socio-economic
background. Leutwyler and Merki (2009)
found that that gender played no role in the
deployment of self-efficacy and persistence.
Gender was stabilized to explain no
variances in cognitive and metacognitive
self-regulation (ibid).
Journal for Studies in Management and Planning Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP
e-ISSN: 2395-0463 Volume 01 Issue 10
November 2015
119| P a g e http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/Available online:
9. CONCLUSION
Taking into account the relevant theories,
research, reviews, and meta-analytical
studies of the self-regulation literature, it is
generally agreed that the findings about the
organization of self-regulation and its strong
relationship with performance and success
are highly reliable (Pintrich and Schunk,
1996). The literature elucidated the value of
self-regulated learning and constructive role
of learning and teaching environment in its
burgeoning and fostering.
With self-regulation skill training
programs being incorporated as separate
courses in most disciplines in addition to
content knowledge teaching programs in
today’s education, magnitude of this skill in
enabling effective learning is being
conveyed. Helping students to reach the
point that they have the capacity to regulate
their own learning is advised to equip
learners to advance their learning. By the
same token, other- regulation and co-
regulation is a way of propelling learners
into self-regulation.
However, trickling learners into
academic self-regulation and dispensing
gradually with other regulation and co-
regulation with teachers and peers seeks a
supporting learning environment. Transition
from other regulation by teachers and co-
regulation by peers to self regulation seeks a
fostering learning environment which
provides skill and will for self-regulated
learning. Paris & Paris (2001) assert that
helping students to become self-regulated
not only promotes more sui juris, competent,
and determined learners, but is also likely to
elevate test scores. A supporting and
empowering environment is required to be
designed and implemented by teachers and
educators to motivate learners to deploy
self-regulatory strategies. However, despite
this strong advocacy of the value of this
capacity, teachers still struggle and hesitate
to provide learning experiences that support
this learning capacity in students (Prain,
2008).
As literature enlightened how
cognition, motivation, affect and context are
closely intertwined in promoting self-
regulation, attending to all these elements in
conjunction with teaching of strategies and
skills elevates higher achievement and
wellbeing of learners. The review made it
clear how the enrichment of self-regulatory
capacities in the forms of perceptions and
beliefs assists learners to attain success. It
commands attentions of learners and
teachers at collegiate levels and beyond and
even more importantly those serving at basic
levels of education and primary school to
heed more attention to this skill since the
development of this capacity appeared to be
incremental developing faster and faster
after the initial stages of schooling.
The aforesaid studies accentuating the
interplay between self-regulation
phenomenon and success encourage learners
to mull once again over self-regulatory
strategies and put this fruitful skill into use.
The concrete data also remind practitioners
and educators to rehash and review their
content delivery methods, interaction with
students, apprehension of self-regulatory
behavior of college language learners and
thorough insight into learners’ perceptions
of motivational beliefs. The evidence
provided prevails on educators and
curriculum developers to cogitate more on
modifying and revising learning and
teaching environment. With contextual
factors, directly and indirectly, affecting
development of this skill more practice en
route to enhancing self-regulated learning,
which eventually, result in deep learning is
suggested.
The literature likewise spur curriculum
developers and syllabus designers to revise
Journal for Studies in Management and Planning Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP
e-ISSN: 2395-0463 Volume 01 Issue 10
November 2015
120| P a g e http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/Available online:
their materials for incorporating more
problem solving tasks and group working
activities, intervention programs, strategy
training courses for bolstering self-regulated
learning which has been shown to be the
cornerstone of constructivist learning.
References
[1] [1] Al-Harthy, I. S, & Was, C.A.
(2010). Goals, efficacy and metacognitive
self-regulation. International Journal of
Education. 2010, Vol.2, No.1.
[2] [2] Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms;
Goals, structures, and student motivation.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 84,
261-271.
[3] [3] Azevedo, R. Cromley, J. G., &
Seibert, D. (2004). Does adaptive
scaffolding facilitate students’ ability to
regulate their learning with hypermedia?
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29,
3.
[4] [4] Bandura, A. (1986). Social
foundations of thought and action: A social
cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
[5] [5] Bandura, A. (1997). Self-
efficacy: The exercise of control. New York:
Freeman.
[6] [6] Baumeister, R.F., & Vohs, K. D.
(2004). Sexual economics: Sex as female
resource for social
a. exchange in heterosexual
interactions. Personality and Social
Psychology Review, 8,339 – 363.
[7] [7] Boekaerts, M., Maes, S. &
Karoly, P. (2005). Self-regulation across
domains of applied psychology:Is there an
emerging consensus? Applied Psychology,
54(2), 149-154.
[8] [8] Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, and M
Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation
(pp. 13-39). San Diego, CA: Academic.
[9] [9] Boekaerts, M., Maes, S., &
Corno, L. (2005). Self-regulation in the
classroom: A perspective on assessment and
intervention. Applied Psychology, 54, 267–
99.
[10] [10] Brockett, R. G. & Hiemstra, R
(1991). Self-Direction in adult learning:
Perspectives on theory, research, and
practice. New York: Routledge.
[11] [11] Bryan, C. L. (2006). Self-
Determination in physical education:
Designing class environents to promote
active lifestyles. A dissertation Submitted to
the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State
University and Agricultural and Mechanical
College in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy. Retrieved Novemeber 4, 2010,
from http://www. etd.lsu.edu.
[12] [12] Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H.
(1995). Feedback and self-regulated
learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of
Educational Research, 65, 245-281.
[13] [13] Butler, D. L., Lauscher, H. N.,
Jarvis-Selinger, S., & Beckingham, B.
(2004). Collaboration and self-regulation in
teachers’ professional development.
Teaching and Teacher Education , 20 (5),
435-455.
[14] [14] Cleary, T. J. & Zimmerman, B.
J. (2004). Self-regulation empowerment
program: A school-based program to
enhance self-regulated and Self-motivated
cycles of student learning. Psychology in
the Schools, Vol. 41(5), 2004.
[15] [15] Deci, E.L., Vallerand, R.J.,
Pelletier, L.G. and Ryan, R.M. (1991).
Motivation in education: The self-
determination perspective. Educational
Psychologist, 26, 325- 346.
[16] [16] Dinsmore, D. L., Alexander, P.
A., & Loughlin, S. M. (2008). Focusing the
conceptual lens on metacognition, self-
regulation, and self-regulated learning.
Educational Psychology
Journal for Studies in Management and Planning Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP
e-ISSN: 2395-0463 Volume 01 Issue 10
November 2015
121| P a g e http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/Available online:
a. Review, 20, pp.391-401.
[17] [17] Duckworth, K., Akerman, R.,
MacGregor A., Salter, E., & Vorhaus ,
J.(2009). Self-regulated learning: A
literature review .London: Published by
Centre for Research on the Wider Benefits
of Learning (WBL), Institute of Education.
[18] [18] Elliot, A. J., (1999). Approach
and avoidance motivation goals.
Educational Psychologist, 34(3), pp.169-
189.
[19] [19] Driver, R. (1988) Theory into
practice II: A constructivist approach to
curriculum development.
[02] In P. Fensham (ed), Development and
Dilemmas in Science Education (London:
Falmer).
[21] [
20] Flavell, J. (1979). Metacognition
and cognitive monitoring: A new area
of cognitive- developmental inquiry.
American Psychologist, 34, 906}911.
[22] [
21] Harrison, S. and Prain, Vaughan. (2009).
Self-regulated learning in junior secondary
English. Issues in Educational Research,
19(3), 2009.
[23] [22] Hong, E. & O’Neil, Jr. H. F. (
2001). Construct validation of a trait self-
regulation model. International Journal of
psychology, 2001, 36 (3), 186–194.
[24] [23]
Leutwyler, B. & Merki, M.K. ( 2009).
School effects on students' self-regulated
learning .Journal for Educational Research
Online .Volume 1 (2009), No. 1, 197–223.
[25] [24] Lin, Xi-Zhe ( 2004). Successful
EFL learners and their self-regulation: A
case study of students in advanced English
program in one university motivation. A
dissertation submitted to university of Ming
Chuan in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of Master of
Arts in applied linguistics. Retrieved August
7, 2010, from
http://www.ethesys.lib.mcu.edu.tw
[26] [25] Linnenbrink, E. A. & Pintrich,
P. R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for
academic success. School Psychology
Review, 31(3).
[27] [26] Liu, H. H.(2008). Scale
development and causal-effect studies of
self-regulation in English language learning.
Retrieved October 12, 2010, from
http://www.
tc.academia.edu/heidihtliu/Papers/1586951/
DissertationAbstractsInternational-Abstract.
[28] [27] Magno Carlo (2010). Assessing
academic self-regulated learning among
Filipino college students: The Factor
Structure and Item Fit .The International
Journal of educational and psychological
assessment. Vol. 5.
[29] [28] Paris, S. G. & Paris, A. H.
(2001).Classroom application of research on
self-regulated learning. Educational
Psychologist, 36, 89-101.
[30] [
29] Pintrich, P. & De Groot, E. (1990).
Motivational and self-regulated learning
components of classroom academic
performance. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 82, 33-40.
[31] [
30] Pintrich, P. & De Groot, E. (1990).
Motivational and self-regulated learning
components of classroom academic
performance. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 82, 33-40.
[32] [31] Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role
of goal orientation in self-regulated learning.
In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, and M
Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation
(pp. 451-502). San Diego: Academic.
[33] [33] Pintrich, P. R. & Smith, D. A.
F., Garcia, T. & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A
Manual for the Use of the Motivated
Strategies for Learning Questionnaire
Journal for Studies in Management and Planning Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP
e-ISSN: 2395-0463 Volume 01 Issue 10
November 2015
122| P a g e http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/Available online:
(MSLQ). Ann Arbor, MI: NCRIPTAL,The
University of Michigan, 1991: 3.
[34] [34] Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H.
(1996). Motivation in education: Theory,
research, and applications. Englewood
Cli!s, NJ: Prentice Hall Merrill.
[35] [35] Pintrich, and Zeidner, M. (Eds.).
Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451-502).
San Diego: Academic.
[36] [36] Pokay, P., & Blumenfeld, P. C.
(1990). Predicting achievement early and
late in the semester: The role of motivation
and use of learning strategies. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 82, 41-50.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.41
[37] [37] Prain, V. (2008). A case study
of self-regulated learning in junior
secondary English. Paper presented at the
Australian Association for Research in
Education Conference, Brisbane, November
30-December 4, 2008. Issues in Educational
Research, 19(3), 2009.
[38] [38] Pratontep, C. & Chinwonno, A.
(2008). Self-regulated learning by Thai
university students in an EFL extensive
reading program.MANUSYA: Journal of
Humanities, 11.2, 2008.
[39] [39] Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L.
(2006). Self-regulation and the problem of
human autonomy: Does psychology need
choice, self-determination, and will? .
Journal of Personality, 74(6), pp. 1557-
1585.
[40] [40] Schmeichel, B. J. and
Baumeister, R. F. (2004). Self-regulatory
strength. In: Baumeister, R. F., and Vohs,
K.D. (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation.
Research, Theory and Applications,
Guilford Press, New York, pp. 84-98.
[41] [41] Schunk, D. H. (1995). Self-
efficacy and education and instruction. In J.
E. Maddux (Ed.), Self-efficacy, adaptation,
and adjustment: Theory, research, and
application (pp. 281–303). New York:
Plenum.
[42] [42] Schunk, D. H. (2001). Social
cognitive theory and self-regulated learning.
In B. J. Adult Education Quarterly, 35, 1-10.
[43] [43] Schunk, D. H. (2005).
Commentary on self-regulation in school
contexts. Learning and Instruction , (15)
173-177.
[44] [44] Schunk, D. H, & Zimmerman,
B. J. (1998). Self-regulated learning: From
teaching to self-reflective practice. New
York: The Guilford Press.
[45] [45] Sungur, S. & Gungoren,
S.(2009).The role of classroom environment
perceptions in self-regulated learning and
science achievement. Elementary Education
Online, 8(3), 883-900, 2009. Retrieved July
17, 2010, from http://ilkogretim-
online.org.tr/pdf
[46] [46] Susimesta, M. (2006).Motivated
and self-regulated learning of adult learners
in a collective online environment. A
dissertation presented in university of
Tampere in research center for professional
and vocational education. Retrieved July 7,
2011, from, http://www.acta.uta.fi/pdf [47] [47] Thomas, J. W & Rohwer, W. D.,
Jr. (1993). Proficient autonomous learning:
problems and prospects. In M. Rabinowitz
(Ed.) Cognitive science foundations of
instruction, (pp.1-32). Hillsdale, NJ:
Earlbaum.
[48] [48] Tseng, W. T., Dörnyei, Z.,
Schmitt, N. (2006). A new approach to
assessing strategic learning: the case of self-
regulation in vocabulary acquisition.
Applied Linguistics, 78-102.learning: the
case of self-regulation in vocabulary
acquisition. Applied Linguistic 78-102.
[49] [49] Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in
society: The development of higher
psychological processes. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
[50] [50] Weinstein, C. E. (1987).
Learning and study strategies inventory
Journal for Studies in Management and Planning Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP
e-ISSN: 2395-0463 Volume 01 Issue 10
November 2015
123| P a g e http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/Available online:
(LASSI). Clearwater, F: H & H Publishing
Company.
[51] [
51] Winne, P.H. and Perry, N.E. (2000)
Measuring self-regulated learning. In P.
Pintrich, M. Boekaerts and M. Zeidner (eds)
Handbook of self-regulation. Orlando, FL:
Academic Press.
[52] [52] Wolters, C. (2010). Self-
regulated learning and the 21st
Century
Competencies. Retrieved July 7, 2011, from,
http://www.hewlett.org/pdf
[53] [53] Young, M.R. (2005).The
motivational effects of the classroom
environment in facilitating self-regulated
learning. Journal of Marketing Education ,
April 2005; Vol 27; 25. No1 24-40.
[54] [54] Yen, L. Ng. M. (2007).
Exploring children's self regulated learning
skills. International Conference on
Educational Reform, November 9-11, 2007,
Mahasarakham University, Thailand.
[55] [55] Yen Lee Ng, et al., (2005).Self-
Regulated Learning in Malaysian Smart
Schools: International Education Journal,
2005, 6(3), 343-353.ISSN 1443-1475 ©
2005 Shannon Research
Press.http://iej.cjb.net.
[56] [56] Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A
social cognitive view of self-regulated
academic learning. Journal of Educational
Psychology 81 (3): 329-39.
[57] [57] Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-
regulated learning and academic
achievement :An overview. Journal of
Educational psychology, 25(1), 3-7.
[58] [58] Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-
regulation involves more than
metacognition: A social cognitive
perspective. Educational Psychologist, 30
(4), 217-221.
[59] [59] Zimmerman, B. J. (1997).
Becoming a self-regulated writer: A social
cognitive perspective. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 22, 73-101.
[60] [60] Zimmerman, B. J. (2000).
Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive
perspective. In M. Zimmerman, B. J., &
Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student
differences in self-regulated learning:
Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-
efficacy and strategy use. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 82, 51-59.
[61] [61] Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Self-
regulation, achieving self-regulation: The
trial and triumph of adolescence. In F. Frank
Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Academic
motivation of adolescents (pp. 1-28).
Connecticut: Information Age Publishing.
[62] [62] Zimmerman, B. J., and M.
Martinez-Pons (1986). Development of a
structured interview for assessing student
use of self-regulated learning strategies.
American Educational Research Journal,
23:614-28.
[63] [63] Zimmerman & Schunk, D. H.
(1989). Self-regulated learning and
academic achievement. Theory, research
and practice (S. 83-110). New York:
Springer-Verlag.